The Interdisciplinary Resource  
  Subscribe
Login
 
 
     
Search  
Sort by:
Results Listed:
Date Range:
  Advanced Search
 
The World & I eLibrary

Teacher's Corner

World Gallery

Global Culture Studies (at homepage)

 
 
Social Studies

Language Arts

Science


The Arts

Spanish
 
 
Crossword Puzzle
 
 
American Indian Heritage
American Waves
Biographies
Ceremonies/Festivities
Diversity in America
Eye on the High Court
Fathers of Faith
Footsteps of Lincoln
Genes & Biotechnology
Impacts
Media in Review
Millennial Moments
Peoples of the World
Poetry
Point/Counterpoint
Profiles in Character
Science and Spirituality
Shedding Light on Islam
Speech & Debate
The Civil War
The U.S. Constitution
Traveling the Globe
Worldwide Folktales
World of Nature
Writers & Writing

 

Is Peronism Democratic?


Article # : 16418 

Section : CURRENT ISSUES
Issue Date : 5 / 1989  2,073 Words
Author : David C. Jordan

       On May 14, Argentines are scheduled to go to the polls to elect a new government. Should these elections occur and an orderly transfer of power take place in December, this will be the first time one elected government has succeeded another since Juan D. Peron succeeded himself in 1952.
       
        Most recent public opinion polls show the Peronist Party candidate, Carlos Saul Menem, winning this election over the Radical Party's standard-bearer, Eduardo Angeloz. Since the Radical Party has an established reputation as democratic, most concern for the consolidation of Argentine democracy is expressed over the democratic credentials of the Peronists. The debate over the party's founder, Peron, is probably destined to be a permanent part of Argentina's historiography, but the nature of his party's democratic commitment, now that he is dead, can be tested should Menem win.
       
        Many people had written the Peronists obituary after they lost the 1983 elections to the Raulm Alfonsin-led Radical Party. Peronism was thought to have entered into a severe depression as a result of this defeat. The party was internally fragmented, divided between traditionalists and a renovating wing, and perceived as containing many antidemocratic elements. Now it is poised to win the upcoming elections and carries the main responsibility for continuing the legitimation of Argentine democracy.
       
        There are three major threats to this progress. First, the Menem-led Peronists will inherit an economy from the Alfonsin adminstration that is in even more serious difficulties than the one Alfonsin inherited from the military. Inflation was as high in 1988 (nearly 400 percent) as it was at the end of the 1980-83 period. Industrial GDP is stagnant, and the external debt is $15 billion higher.
       
        There is a consensus among serious economists on the essential steps to be taken. But since Alfonsin was unable to accomplish very much toward privatizing the state enterprise, considerable doubt exits that Menem will be able to do so either, given that this dependence on the labor bureaucracies and populist rhetoric is even greater than Angeloz's. But if Menem is to succeed, he will have to reduce state bureaucracies, encourage exports, reshedule external debt, sell state enterprises, and reduce internal debt. These measures will lead him into direct clashes with vested interests that have been core supporters of the Peronist movement, which is often seen as far more static than democratic in the sense of the regime having more power than society. The democratic ideal, in its regime sense, means that power is divided and governing power is accountable to the people as a whole. The Peronists' typical reaction to economic difficulty has been to increase protection of state enterprise, and this will have to change if the economy is to improve. One of Menem's proposed economy ministers, Domingo Cavallo, has promoted market rules for Argentina's economy, but many longtime observers of the Peronists are skeptical that such views will prevail.
       
        Second, the military's attitude toward the democratic restoration seems far more negative than it was in 1983. It is true that it was not happy with Alfonsin's campaign against it, but it was in no position to do anything about it. Since Alfonsin has been in office, however, there have been three military mutinies, successful pressure to stop human rights trials against the conduct of the "dirty war" of the 1970s, and a resurgence of
... Read Full Article
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2008 The World & I Online. All rights reserved.